When the state is shirking: Informal solutions for social services provision in Altai villages

• Authors: Kurakin Alexandr
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The article contributes to the discussion on the informal economic activity in postsocialist countries. Quite often this activity is related to state regulation. We provide evidence from rural Russia suggesting that state shirking also can give rise to informal economic relations. Empirical data from Altai Krai show that informal transfers from farms to rural municipalities are used to provide rural social sector. Despite the collapse of socialist agricultural system, when rural communities existed under patronage of collective farms, substantial part of the privately owned post-Soviet farms still donate to rural municipalities and population. The article is based on the fieldwork conducted in Altai Krai in 2013 when qualitative data (informal interviews, group discussions, observations) were collected by the author and his colleagues. Gift-giving relations between agricultural producers and municipalities could be described as “natural” bottom-up pattern. We perceive these Soviet-style giftgiving relations as the way to mitigate the weaknesses both of the Russian state rural policy as well as market self-regulation mechanism. Despite it could slow down economic performance of farms, it is the way to prevent rural degradation and depopulation.

Keywords

EN

rural Russia; Altai Krai; gift; rural communities; informal economy; social sector; rural policy

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warmińsko-Mazurskiego
• Journal: Przegląd Wschodnioeuropejski
• Year: 2015
• Volume: 2
• Pages: 145-159

Dates

published

2015-10-01

Contributors

author

Kurakin Alexandr

• National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE) (Moscow)
• Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (Moscow)

References

• Acemoglu, D. (2005), Politics and economics in weak and strong states. In: Journal of monetary economics. LII/7, 1199-1226.
• Bandelj, N., Sowers, E. (2010), Economy and state: A sociological perspective. Cambridge.
• Block, F. (1994), The roles of the state in the economy. In: Smelser, N, Swedberg, R. (eds.), The handbook of economic sociology. Princeton, 691-710.
• Block, F., Evans, P. (2005), The state and the economy. In: Smelser, N, Swedberg, R. (eds.), The handbook of economic sociology. Second edition. Princeton, 505-526.
• Bourdieu, P. (2001), The forms of capital. In: The sociology of economic life. Granovetter, M, Swedberg, R. (eds.). Second edition. Boulder, 96-111.
• Coleman, J. (1988), Social capital in the creation of human capital. In: American journal of sociology. XCIV/supplement, 95-120.
• De Soto, H. (2002 [1989]), The other path: The economic answer to terrorism. New York.
• Dore, R. (1983), Goodwill and the spirit of capitalism. In: The British journal of sociology. XXXIV/4, 459-482.
• Esping-Andersen, G. (1990), The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge.
• Esping-Andersen, G. (1994), Welfare states and the economy. In: SmelserN, Swedberg R. (eds.), The handbook of economic sociology. Princeton, 711-732.
• Evans, P. (1995), Embedded autonomy: States and industrial transformation. Princeton.
• Evans, P., Rueschemeyer, D., Skocpol, T. (eds.) (1985), Bringing the state back in. Cambridge.
• Frye, T., Shleifer, A. (1997), The invisible hand and the grabbing hand. In: American economic review. LXXXVII/2, 354-358.
• Gambetta, D. (1993), The Sicilian mafia: The business of private protection. Cambridge.
• Garriga, E., Mele, D. (2004), Corporate social responsibility theory: Mapping the territory. In: Journal of business ethics. LIII/1-2, 51-71.
• Granovetter, M. (1985), Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. In: American journal of sociology. XCI/3, 481-510.
• Hodge, G., Greve, C. (2007), Public-private partnerships: An international performance review. In: Public administration review. LXVII/3, 545-558.
• Huber,E., Stephens,J. (2005), Welfare states and the economy. In: SmelserN, SwedbergR. (eds.), The handbook of economic sociology. Second edition. Princeton, 552-574.
• Malinowski, B. (1922), Argonauts of the Western Pacific: An account of native enterprise and adventure in the archipelagoes of melanesian New Guinea. London.
• Mamonova,N., Visser,O. (2014), State marionettes, phantom organizations or genuine movements? The paradoxical emergence of rural social movements in post-socialist Russia. In: The journal of peasant studies. XLI/4, 491-516.
• Mauss, M. (1954), The gift: Forms and functions of exchange in archaic societies. London.
• O’Brien, D., Wegren, S., Patsiorkovsky, V. (2005), Marketization and community in post-Soviet Russian villages. In: Rural sociology. LXX/2, 188-207.
• Portes,A. (1994), The informal economy and its paradoxes. In: SmelserN, SwedbergR. (eds.), The handbook of economic sociology. Princeton, 426-449.
• Portes, A. (2005), The informal economy. In: Smelser, N, Swedberg, R. (eds.), The handbook of economic sociology. Second edition. Princeton, 403-425.
• Putnam, R. (1995), Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. In: Journal of democracy. VI/1, 65-78.
• Stark, D. (1996), Recombinant property in East European capitalism. In: American journal of sociology. CI/4, 993-1027.
• Volkov, V. (2002), Violent entrepreneurs: The use of force in the making of Russian capitalism. Ithaca.
• Куракин, A. (2012), Белгородские сельскохозяйственные кооперативы: между администрацией, рынком и сообществами. В: Крестьяноведение. Теория. История. Современность. VII, 312-344.
• Линднер, П. (2002), Репродукционные круги богатства и бедности в сельских сообществах России. В: Социологические исследования. 1, 51-60.
• Никулин, A. (2002), Крупхозы современной России: варианты развития. В: Рефлексивное крестьяноведение: десятилетие исследований сельской России. Москва.
• Никулин, A. (2010), Олигархоз как преемник постколхоза. В: Экономическая социология. XI/1, 17-33.
• Никулин, A. (ред.) (2012), Вторая Россия: дифференциация и самоорганизация. Москва.
• Панеях Э. (2008), Правила игры для российского предпринимателя. Москва.
• Фадеева, О. (2003), Сельские предприниматели в местном сообществе. В: Экономическая социология. IV/2, 73-87.
• Фадеева, О. (2012), Социально-экономический потенциал сельской многоукладности (на примере Белгородской области). В: Регион: экономика и социология. LXXVI/4, 139-160.

Identifiers

ISSN

081-1128